January 24, 2000
Subject: More about the FDA and GMOs: AIDS Cure Invented By Oklahoma General Practitioner + AIDS TREATMENT FOR THE WORLD HAS BEEN SUPPRESSED FOR OVER TWO YEARS + FDA Attacks The Internet - ABOLISH the FDA + Shoot yourself in the Foot !!! + New Dental Amalgam Material Contains No Mercury + Pandora's Pantry + Greenpeace Wins First Round in EPA Lawsuit to Ban Bt Crops + Biosafety at Montreal--five positions + U.S. to meet EU label rules on GMOs
Hello everyone
Last week I sent out this letter and accompanying material to my media list and I thought many of you would also like to review this material. In addition to this, you will also find some other recent updates on the Frankenfood issue. We also have a major biosafety conference in Montreal this week - see info below...
Hello
I believe this other infamous blunder - or deliberate crime against
humanity?? - by the American Food and Drug Administration needs to be
widely exposed. While at least 30 million people around the world are
infected by the AIDS virus and millions of them are dying every year,
mostly in Africa where 5 millions people are now infected each year, a
human tragedy of apocalyptic proportions leaving millions or orphaned
children to fend for themselves in the poorest continent on Earth, a cure
has been found for this dreadful disease and yet has been withheld, most
likely to protect the lucrative market of giant pharmaceutical companies
that make billions out of this disease (I don't buy the "out of the
Official Aid Research Community" excuse given below).
To see the FDA stonewall and dismiss out of hand the doctor who found the
cure can but lead any intelligent observer to conclude that the FDA is in
league with these profit-hungry giants and thus completely corrupted.
Either the US Administration entirely purges this derelict agency from all
its rotten fruits or it disband it entirely.
Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator
http://www.cybernaute.com/earthconcert2000
AIDS Cure Invented By Oklahoma General Practitioner
By Forres McGraw
http://www3.50megs.com/medical/aids/aidscure.html
MIRACLE GIRL OR MIRACULOUS CURE?
Seven year old Precious Thomas, by most standards, is like any other bright,
happy seven year old. Precious' most incredible attribute is that she used
to have AIDS. No, that is not a typo. During March, 1998, Precious was
included in studies and clinical trials at the National Institutes for
Health, one of the leading research centers for AIDS. On March 23, 1998 in a
viral-load test administered by NIH, Precious' viral-load was 186,119. It
went to ZERO. What NIH did not know at the time was Precious had stopped
taking the drugs it prescribed her under its protocol. What has the NIH
discovered since, that it hasn't disclosed?
Precious' mother, Rocky Thomas will admit, though her daughter is an
exceptional child, she has not performed any miracles. The "miraculous cure"
comes from the brilliance and perseverance of Dr. Gary R. Davis, M.D. of
Tulsa, Oklahoma. Dr. Davis developed his treatment three years ago. Two
years ago, Dr. Davis applied for FDA approval to administer a clinical trial
using his treatment. The application for clinical trial was approved
initially, only to be revoked hours prior to its beginning.
While comforting her daughter, who was in the hospital and not being helped
by the protocol being administered by NIH, Rocky recalled a news story she
had seen about Dr. Davis, a General Practitioner who has created a goat
serum based treatment he is forbidden by law to administer. Like any mother,
Rocky vowed to do anything to ease her child,s suffering. Rocky took
Precious to Tulsa to see Dr. Davis. However, the FDA had not and has not to
date approved Dr. Davis' treatment. As much as he would have loved to help
her, he was barred from doing so. Though he could not treat her, he spent
much of his afternoon with Rocky and Precious. Sharing his knowledge of the
disease and answering questions regarding his treatment proposed to the FDA
in his application for approval of clinical trial. In the end there was
still nothing he could do for Precious.
Fortunately for Precious, the mother was willing to do anything for her
child, and did just that. Rocky now admits, she stole a vial of Dr. Davis'
serum that day from his office, and administered it to Precious. In five
doses, consisting of less than 2cc's each, over a forty-four day period
beginning March 26, 1998, Rocky administered the stolen serum to her
daughter recalling all she could about her conversation with Dr. Davis.
Precious is still being monitored by her doctors at NIH, Dr. Predita Taylor
and Dr. Anthony Falchia. In fact NIH has run viral load tests on her twelve
times since March 23, 1998. The last six tests have shown undetectable
levels of the virus in Precious. Surprisingly, or not, depending upon your
view, these doctors, charged with the care of many AIDS infected patients
and knowing now that Precious has been cured, have yet to call Dr. Davis to
find out more about his treatment.
The reality is the National Institute of Health felt vilified by the
usurpation of their protocol by Mrs. Thomas. Prior to learning the girl was
treated with Dr. Davis' serum, Dr. Perdita Taylor had just taken credit for
the cure of Precious Thomas. When told the truth she shriveled into a "no
comment" posture.
The FDA, instead of offering to help expedite Dr. Davis, application, has
continually stalled the process. As many questions as this may raise, one
demands our immediate attention. Why is the brilliant work of an African
American General Practitioner being suppressed? This may be the answer to
saving millions of lives! Is it simply because Dr. Davis does not belong to
the Official Aid Research Community? That seems to be what is happening
here.
There are many other terminally ill patients choosing to live who are barred
by the FDA from availing themselves of the opportunity to be cured, if
indeed this serum proves to be a universal cure.
Every taxpayer should be demand some answers from his or her congressional
representative, senator, and the FDA.
©1998 Forres McGraw/Greenwich Village Gazette
AIDS TREATMENT FOR THE WORLD HAS BEEN SUPPRESSED FOR OVER TWO YEARS
By Forres McGraw
The Greenwich Village Gazette featured the story above nearly two years ago.
At the time it told a most incredulous tale--a supposed cure by a back
country Doctor for the worst illness of mankind, made from a Goat Serum. A
little girl named Precious Thomas was free from all viral count, according
to the National Institute of Health. The NIH had been treating the child
with their protocol. Unknown to them, the girl's mother, Rocky, had taken
the new, unrecognized treatment from the offices of Dr. Gary Davis. That
first article was featured on an obscure CBS affiliate program out of
Houston, Texas. Mr. McGraw brought it to our attention. After the Gazette
published it here in New York, it was picked up by Fox, ABC and PBS. In
fact, Little Precious was a guest at the White House and was a guest at the
National Convention Of the NAACP in November 1999.
SINCE THE ARTICLE ABOVE, I have joined forces with Dr. Gary Davis and we are
still fighting a losing war with the United States Food & Drug
Administration, although we are now, at long last, working under a
memorandum of understanding with National Institute of Health to replicate
the antibody used so successfully with Precious Thomas.
Currently we have had to take Dr. Davis treatment out of our own country,
north to Cananda where the medication can be used without governmental
approvals. This is based on the Canadian personal use law, which allows
Canadian citizens to purchase, for their own personal use, a three month
supply of any non-approved drugs or biologics. Due to this wonderful access
law of our civilized Canadian neighbors, Dr. Davis was able to treat a 12
year old boy in Canada three weeks ago. The boy's family asked that he go
unnamed.
Like little Precious Thomas, this boy was also born with the virus, and by
both his doctor's and father's account has been subjected to every viable
treatment available worldwide. They avoided putting him on the toxic drugs
until June, when he was hospitalized, his lungs filling with fluid.
Fortunately, the father and doctor had finally agreed to give him any drugs,
to stabilize his viral load, which resulted in his recovery and release from
the hospital. The drugs were so strong that the one time he missed the
sequence of his daily medication regimen, the boy was left bed ridden for
twenty-four hours. That is where Dr. Davis came in.
During the examination prior to administering our treatment the boy was
asked how he felt, having recovered from the nasty bout he had. He told us
that he rated his current status of well being as an "eight on a ten-point"
scale.
Then Dr. Davis gave him the medication that had been given to Precious
Thomas. In the next six hours as we observed the twelve year old, color came
back to his face. The marked increase in his energy level was obvious. After
just six hours, when asked again how he felt, he rated it a "30 on a
10-point" scale, relative to how he felt immediately before receiving
Davis's treatment.
No side effects have been observed so far in the three weeks since his
treatment and he has taken no other medication since. We are currently
waiting on lab results, which we will publish as soon as they become
available..
Dr. Davis and I have all but given up on the FDA, and we are seeking more
and expanded international venues for treatment.
Precious Thomas was the keynote speaker at the national NAACP meeting in DC
on November 20th.
Being a US citizen, Precious is not allowed to continue the medication that
had brought her Viral Count Load down to ZERO and kept it there for three
months. She cannot take it because there is no money in this for the large
Drug Companies. Precious does have a viral load back again, though small.
But we can not treat her here, or any other American Citizen.
Dr. Davis's calculations show she got less than half of the medicine
required to maintain a viral load of zero. She only got that because her
mother, Rocky Thomas took it from Davis without his knowledge.
To complain about the FDA to the FDA feel free to email them at:
<mailto:OSHI@oc.fda.govOSHI@oc.fda.gov or here
<http://www.fda.gov/oashi/comoshi.html
You can also call the FDA toll-free 1-888-INFO-FDA (1-888-463-6332) for
comments and suggestions
Direct inquiries about this article to: jocelyn@dewittec.net subject = Aids
Cure Article
I ALSO RECEIVED THIS;
From: jeff.gordon@wellnow.com
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000
Subject: [Well Now] AIDS 'myths' at ABC.com
This brief article was brought to our attention by James DeMeo who sent
word of it to his OBR-l mail list:
An excellent article exposing myths and lies about HIV and AIDS, now breaking into the mainstream.
This one is by Nicholas Regush, on ABC News.com:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/living/SecondOpinion/secondopinion.html
HERE IS A COMMENT THAT I COULD NOT INCLUDE ALONG THIS THE ANTI-FDA EMAIL ABOVE:
From: "Dave" <dave@asheville-computer.com>
Subject: FDA Attacks The Internet - ABOLISH the FDA
Date: Sat, 8 Jan 2000
Please forward far and wide.
FDA is a rogue agency like BATF - a semi-autonomous little branch of gestapo
government. Time to ABOLISH the FDA - they are rife with criminal
conspiracies, many of which involve Monsanto/Searle. Falsification of data.
Federal crimes, aided and abetted by the agency charged with "safeguarding"
the public against dangerous food additives/drugs. The murderous fraudsters
have struck again with killer Viagra. They are furiously stonewalling and
covering up the deadly aspartame/nutrasweet fraud which is of MAJOR
proportions. rBGH is another CLEAR example of fraud and alienation of the
public trust.
Contact your Congressmen regarding this issue, please.
FDA is an unconstitutional rogue agency which has illegally formed it's own
"swat police", and it should be abolished. Get them before they get YOU or
your freedom to choose healthcare alternatives.
Dave Hartley
http://www.Asheville-Computer.com/dave
From The Life Extension Foundation. You can access the Foundation's Website
at http://www.lef.org
Date: 6 Jan 2000
Subject: FDA Attacks The Internet
FDA SEEKS TO DESTROY ALTERNATIVE HEALTH WEB SITES
(CLIP - THIS IS THE SAME AS THAT WAS SENT LAST WEEK - IT IS NOW POSTED UNDER "Food Safety Files 4" ON THE EARTH RAINBOW NETWORK WEBSITE AT http://www.cybernaute.com/earthconcert2000)
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000
From: "Jennie Gorman" <jennie@acenet.net.au> (by way of Palden Jenkins
<palden@globalnet.co.uk>)
Subject: Shoot your-self in the Foot !!!
Interesting! From a friend in Awstrylya. Palden
Hi
A new light on "modern medicine" and practice by doctors trained only in
drugs--and not in health knowledge. Interesting reading! This is a US
statistic, but I am sure Australia is equal on a pro rata basis!!!
Jennie
DOCTORS KILL MORE THAN GUNS AND AUTO ACCIDENTS MEDICINE THROUGHOUT THE AGES ;-)
0001 AD - Here, eat this root.
1000 AD - That root is heathen. Here, say this prayer.
1850 AD - That prayer is superstition. Here, swallow this potion.
1940 AD - That potion is snake oil. Here, swallow this pill.
1985 AD - That pill is ineffective. Here, take this antibiotic.
2000 AD - That antibiotic is dangerous. Here, eat this root.
DOCTORS KILL MORE THAN GUNS AND AUTO ACCIDENTS PUT TOGETHER.... AS SEEN ON
NATIONAL NEWS
Over 200,000 people a year die from "adverse reactions" from drugs, and
another 80,000 die from medical malpractice, whereas 41,000 die in auto
accidents, according to the pharmacy industry magazine, Drug Topics,
October 23, 1995, pg. 14-16! That's one death every two minutes!
Last year, the pharmaceutical industry did $182 billion in drug sales world
wide. In contrast to that figure, it cost approximately $183 billion to
treat adverse reactions from all of those drugs.
The following admissions were taken from JAMA (Journal of the American
Medical Association):
The top five causes of death in the United States, in order, are:
1) Tobacco
2) Alcohol
3) Medical malpractice
4) Traffic accidents
5) Firearms
According to JAMA, doctors kill more people than auto accidents and guns
put together. The number of people that doctors kill per day from
allopathic medical malpractice is roughly equal to the amount of people
that would die if every day, three jumbo jets crashed and killed everybody
on board.
Just imagine what headlines would result if a chiropractor or a naturopath
accidentally killed just one patient?
hmmmmmmmmm......
More from NBC: http://www.msnbc.com/news/340525.asp?cp1=1#BODY
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000
From: Mark Graffis <ab758@virgin.vip.vi>
Subject: New Dental Amalgam Material Contains No Mercury
EarthVision Reports
01/14/00
GAITHERSBURG, MD, January 14, 2000 - For those of us who have metallic
dental fillings there is a good chance a small amount of mercury is in
our mouths. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
points out that for decades, US dentists have used alloys containing
copper, tin, silver, zinc and mercury in amalgams because they last
long, are strong and corrosion-resistant and bond well to teeth.
However, there is growing concern over placing mercury - a toxic heavy
metal - in the human body. And until now, there were no replacement
materials that worked as well.
However, metallurgists at NIST announced they have perfected a method
for making silver powder that, when properly consolidated, has
properties that equal or exceed those of mercury-containing alloys.
The powder is precipitated from a solution and then treated with a
dilute acid to remove silver oxide from the surface of the very small
silver particles. These particles then can be compacted carefully with
normal dental tools into a tooth cavity where they consolidate through
cold welding. Fillings made this way are 80 percent dense and are at
least as strong as mercury-alloy amalgams.
NIST is inviting companies to apply to license the patented process by
contacting Terry Lynch at (301) 975-2691.
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000
From: DJ <djhewitt@jps.net>
Subject: Pandora's Pantry
Mother Jones January/February 2000 issue
* Featured this week: Pandora's Pantry * - In its rush to approve
genetically engineered food, the government ignored warnings from its own
scientists about threats to human health and the environment. Finally, the
tough questions are being asked.
http://www.motherjones.com/mother_jones/JF00/pandora.html
THIS IS A LONG AND *VERY* WELL DONE ARTICLE. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED! HERE ARE MORE RESOURCES FOUND THERE
Other Resources on Genetically Modified Foods
The Center for Food Safety http://www.foodsafetynow.org Tell the FDA and your Congressional representatives what you think with only a few keystrokes. (The page includes a form letter that you can send as is or personalized.)
Alliance for Bio-Integrity http://www.bio-integrity.org Read original documents in which FDA scientists raised concerns over the 1992 policy.
The Food and Drug Administration's Bioengineered Foods page http://www.fda.govoc/biotech
The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods http://www.thecampaign.org/
Center for Food Safety Home Page http://www.purefood.org
Greenpeace Genetic Engineering Page http://www.greenpeaceusa.or/ge/
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000
From: Mark Graffis <ab758@virgin.vip.vi>
Subject: Greenpeace Wins First Round in EPA Lawsuit to Ban Bt Crops
WASHINGTON, January 19, 2000 -- A top court has agreed to hold the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency accountable for its decision to legalize
the planting of genetically modified crops. In the opening session of
Tuesday's oral hearings against the EPA, Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer of
the Federal District Court of Washington, D.C., stated he would "hold
[EPA's] feet to the fire" and ordered the agency to respond to
Greenpeace's charges within 60 days.
Last February, Greenpeace and a coalition of over 70 plaintiffs, including
the Center for Food Safety and the International Federation of Organic
Agricultural Movements, sued the EPA, charging the agency with the wanton
destruction of the world's most important biological pesticide -- Bt. This
natural pesticide has been used sparingly by organic farmers for years but
is now under threat from genetically engineered crops.
Scientists warn that corn genetically engineered with the Bt pesticide in
each of its cells could lead to insect resistance within 3 to 4 years,
thereby wiping out the effectiveness of Bt for organic farmers. By aiding
in this process, the EPA may force the use of more and newer pesticides in
the near future. Studies also have shown pollen from Bt corn to be toxic
to monarch and other butterfly larvae.
"This is a great, first legal victory for the environment and for farmers
who do not plant genetically modified seed," said Beverley Thorpe of the
Greenpeace GMO campaign. "It is essential we get these gene-altered crops
off our fields and out of our environment."
Market rejection of Bt corn has cost U.S. farmers more than $200 million
in export revenue last year. A recent Reuters poll of 400 farmers (taken
at the annual meeting of the nation's largest farm organization, the
American Farm Bureau Federation) predicted a 24 percent decline in the
planting of Bt corn and a 26 percent decline in the planting of Bt cotton
this year. Currently, Bt corn is grown on approximately 20 million acres
in the U.S., and Bt cotton on about 7 million acres.
Greenpeace is calling on the EPA to halt all new and current licenses for
genetically engineered crops in the U.S., and to urgently reevaluate the
promotion of genetically engineered agriculture with an eye toward
focusing funding on sustainable agriculture.
CONTACT:
Beverley Thorpe, (202) 319-2412
Charles Margulis, Greenpeace, (202) 258-3029 (mobile)
Andrew Kimbrell, counsel and director of Center for Food Safety, (202)
547-9359.
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000
From: Mark Graffis <ab758@virgin.vip.vi>
Subject: Biosafety at Montreal--five positions
This analysis is from Tim Lash <lash@iucn.ca> via Alison R. Hall.
MONTREAL BIOSAFETY PROTOCOL
From http://www.islandpress.org/ecocompass/biosafety/realsafe.html
On Monday, January 24, 2000 the world's governments are resuming talks
towards a legally binding biosafety agreement. The Extraordinary
Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity
(ExCOP) is an attempt to agree on international rules on genetically
modified organisms (GMOs) to be known as "the Biosafety Protocol."
It was agreed at the Second Conference of Parties to the Biodiversity
Convention, in Jakarta November 1995, that an international protocol
on biosafety was needed to complement the Biodiversity Convention
signed in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. At present
there are no binding international agreements addressing situations
where GMOs cross national borders.
The Montreal meeting is a resumption of talks held in February 1999 in
Cartagena de Indias, Colombia. Those talks collapsed in disarray when
negotiators from 174 countries were unable to agree on a biosafety
protocol regulating the transfer and handling of GMOs. The failure of
the Cartagena talks was due to the refusal of a group of grain-
exporting countries (led by the US) to accept environmental controls
over their exports of transgenic crops, and to the refusal of the
European Union to accept a Biosafety Protocol that did not include
such controls.
As we approach the final negotiations on the Biosafety Protocol five
negotiating groups have emerged. Much has been written both in print
and online from all possible points of view regarding the issues
surrounding GMOs. This Eco-Compass feature attempts to give unbiased
access to a variety of information sources on GMOs and international
trade.
Visit us online by clicking below to make the most of these features:
http://www.islandpress.org/ecocompass/biosafety/realsafe.html
THE FIVE NEGOTIATING GROUPS
1: THE MIAMI GROUP--US, Canada, Argentina, Australia, Chile, and
Uruguay
The members of this group are all grain exporting nations who refuse
to accept any environmental or health based safeguards on the transfer
and handling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The Miami Group
is leading the fight to prevent the biosafety process, and protect the
interests of the biotech industry. The main proponent of the
biotechnology industry's efforts is the United States, however as the
country has not ratified the Biodiversity Convention and is therefore
considered a "non-Party" in the process, it has chosen to build a
group around its position to bolster the credibility of its "free
trade" position.
2: THE EUROPEAN UNION--Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain,
Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria,
Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom.
Since the Cartagena meeting the EU has changed its position on GMOs.
This has in no small part been due to pressure from the public, NGOs,
and scientists in Europe. The EU will look for legislation that
stresses the importance of precaution and the need for information,
notification, and consent for GMOs that are intended for food, feed,
or for processing, as well as for seed. Seven leading European
supermarket chains, including J. Sainsbury and Carrefour, last week
announced they would collectively eliminate genetically modified
ingredients (GMOs) from private-label food products. The EU will also
try to incorporate some element of traceability as a prerequisite for
labeling and segregation of genetically modified crops. UK food safety
minister Jeff Rooker has already announced an initiative requiring
fast food restaurants to inform customers if their food contains GMOs.
In addition to trying to find an agreement based on these principles
the EU will also attempt to ensure that any Biosafety Protocol rules
established are not subordinate to international trade rules, such as
those of the WTO.
3: THE LIKE-MINDED GROUP--Group of 77 developing nations.
Most of the developing world is of a mind that it stands to lose most
from a lax or ineffective Biosafety Protocol. It is also the most
susceptible to pressure from Northern-based biotechnology companies.
To make its voice heard in the GMO debate these countries have formed
the Like-Minded Group that is made up of the G77 group of developing
countries except for Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay, but with China.
These countries, which represent the vast majority of the world's
population and play host to the bulk of the world's biodiversity, fear
a major loss of biodiversity and potential income as genetically
engineered crops replace traditional farming methods and plants. The
Like-Minded Group will argue for the strongest possible environmental
and health rights under Biosafety Protocol unless it falls prey to the
lobbying efforts of the biotechnology companies.
4: THE COMPROMISE GROUP--Japan, South Korea, Mexico, New Zealand,
Norway, and Switzerland.
These countries represent "the fence sitters" and "facilitators" and
will be key in the successful completion of the Biodiversity Protocol.
It is expected that as these governments try to steer a middle road
somewhere between the Miami Group and the Europeans, they will be able
to draw the conference into a compromise position.
5: CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEAN GROUP--Albania, Belarus, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia,
Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Poland, Romania,
Russia, Serbia and Montenegro (Fr. Yugoslavia), Slovak Republic,
Slovenia, Ukraine.
This is perhaps the complex group at the convention. Several countries
from amongst this group are attempting to join the European Union and
are thus trying to align their laws with those of the EU as much as
possible. However, the agrochemical-biotech industry, such as
Monsanto, has targeted countries such as Georgia and Ukraine to
cultivate its genetically engineered crops as there are currently very
few biosafety regulations, but a sufficiently high level of
agricultural mechanization.... The influence of the biotech industry
is compounded in this region by the fact many of these governments are
crying out for any form of foreign investment.
Montreal Biosafety Protocol?
http://www.islandpress.org/ecocompass/biosafety/realsafe.html
Visit this feature online to find links to the best online resources
relating to this subject. The site will be continuously updated
throughout the conference and will provide conference materials and
up-to-the minute reports as they become available.
To subscribe to Eco-Compass send an e-mail message to
islandpress-l-subscribe@igc.topica.com
Eco-Compass by Island Press
The Environmental Publisher
1 (800) 828-1302
1 (707) 983-6432
Fax: 1 (707) 983-6414
info@islandpress.org
http://www.islandpress.org"BR>
Check out the new and improved Topica site!
http://www.topica.com/t/13
****************
alisonh@cam.org
514-636-8406
Dorval, Quebec
U.S. to meet EU label rules on GMOs
David Evans
THE HAGUE, Jan 21 (Reuters) - U.S. exporters are ready to meet the European
Union's new one percent threshold on labelling food containing genetically
modified organisms, although the system may actually heighten consumer
fears, a top U.S. trade official said on Friday.
EU rules forcing food producers to label their products as containing GMOs
if they cannot guarantee each of the ingredients contains less than one
percent of GM material came into force earlier this month.
They do not provide for a ``GM-free'' label as separate rules are still
being drafted on how to define GM-free.
``Our companies are prepared to meet the one percent threshold for
incidental contamination by genetically modified material,'' U.S. Under
Secretary of Commerce David Aaron told a biotechnology conference. But he
said the rules were open to alarmist media stories or claims from individual
scientists or lobby groups that products without labels had in fact breached
the ceiling.
Unless testing methods were improved, ``labelling will actually undermine
confidence in products, in government, and in the regulatory process. It
will add to, not reduce, public concern,'' Aaron said.''
EU SAYS CONSUMERS HAVE RIGHT TO KNOW
But European food safety commissioner David Byrne insisted consumers had a
right to know what they were eating and that labelling of GM products was
``a cornerstone'' in getting the new GM products widely accepted.
The European Commission has pledged to review the one percent threshold in a
year's time to see if improved testing procedures make it possible to set a
lower level.
Byrne told the two-day conference, sponsored by the U.S. government, his
recently presented food policy paper, including a blueprint for new food
safety authority, showed the EU was ``acutely aware of the need to have a
coherent and predictable framework on GMO foods, animal feeds and seeds.''
Whereas Aaron highlighted the fact that the consumption of GMOs has never
been linked to any ailment or disease, Byrne said European reluctance was
based on a view that biotechnology had little to offer the food consumer.
``It has to be recognised that most GMOs currently on the market are not
targeted to deliver clear benefits for the consumer, rather to provide
benefits for producers,'' he said.
U.S. DISAPPOINTED OVER EU FOOD AGENCY
Aaron said the new EU agency did not go far enough for the U.S., which would
have preferred a more powerful regulatory body similar to the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration.
``We are intrigued by the proposals...but disappointed so far that its scope
would be limited to analysis,'' he said, adding that he believed that a loss
of consumers' trust in the way food production is controlled was the prime
reason for European scepticism over GMOs.
And he criticised the EU's stalled GM approval process, which it says has
damaged the biotech industry in the United States, the world's largest
grower of GM crops.
``The product approval system has effectively broken down,'' Aaron said,
adding that the delay in authorisations ``amounts to an eternity when we
consider how rapidly biotech products are developing.''
EU Appeals for Better Food Labeling
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) - Leading European health officials repeated
calls Friday for the labeling of genetically modified foods, saying measures
need to be taken to gain public support on the sensitive food-safety issue.
In an appeal at a biotechnology conference in The Hague, David Byrne, the
European Union's commissioner for health and consumer protection, said
Europeans consider safety ``the most important ingredient of their food''
and demand information about what they're eating.
Speaking at the conclusion of the two-day, U.S.-sponsored meeting, Byrne
said consumers have ``consistently demanded that foods be labeled ... in
order to make an informed choice.''
A legal framework for genetically modified products is being hammered out by
European legislators to ensure that consumers are provided with ``clear
information and a choice between products,'' Byrne said.
The commission already has approved rules that would require companies to
label foods when genetically modified ingredients make up more than 1
percent of the total.
In cases where scientific evidence is ``insufficient, inconclusive or
uncertain'' in assessing genetically modified foods, measures should be
based on the World Trade Organization guidelines, Byrne said.
He said that in order for biotechnology and genetically modified products to
prosper, consumers need to given a free choice and complete information.
The United States has opposed labeling, insisting that genetically modified
crops are essentially the same as conventionally bred varieties and pose no
threat to humans or the environment.
Among major American exports that have been genetically modified are corn
and soybeans. Genetic engineering involves splicing a single gene from one
organism to another.
Please visit The Campaign's web site at http://www.thecampaign.org
